Attention ID editors, a Category 3 shitstorm is approaching, All editors are reminded to secure their belongings and seek refuge in Options

[Sceptre]

I'm like a headtrip to listen to...

Complete the Real Slim Shady lyrics to your likening (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

This post has been edited by Sceptre:

[Kato]

On the Arbitration page, KillerChihuahua writes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=216282849

Moulton ran afoul of several members of the ID wikiproject because he tried to whitewash an article which is an ID article.

Which article is this? Presumably KillerChihuahua is referring to Moulton's edits to sort out a Biography that was in violation of two crucial supposed Wikipedia "policies". Before Moulton arrived, it contained a number of false assertions since removed, and was a blatant WP:COATRACK. And the subject of that biography had nothing to do with "Intelligent Design", a fact which was at the heart of the dispute.

So this statement by KillerChihuahua has no validity at all.

[Giggy]

On the Arbitration page, KillerChihuahua writes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=216282849

Moulton ran afoul of several members of the ID wikiproject because he tried to whitewash an article which is an ID article.

Which article is this? Presumably KillerChihuahua is referring to Moulton's edits to sort out a Biography that was in violation of two crucial supposed Wikipedia "policies". Before Moulton arrived, it contained a number of false assertions since removed, and was a blatant WP:COATRACK. And the subject of that biography had nothing to do with "Intelligent Design", a fact which was at the heart of the dispute.

So this statement by KillerChihuahua has no validity at all.

From that same statement...

DHMO aka Giggy ''also'' has repeated the "ID CABAL" bullshit which started on WR

Does anyone know where it actually started?

[Kato]

From that same statement...

DHMO aka Giggy ''also'' has repeated the "ID CABAL" bullshit which started on WR

Does anyone know where it actually started?

It started on Wikipedia, when it became apparent that a group of editors on ID and other scientific topics were tighter and more aggressive than a squadron of Gurkhas.

To prove that Giggy and Moulton weren't the first to notice this on WR, here is a post by me a year ago, before either of them were members of this site:

The 3 groups that most closely resemble a cabal on WP are

1. The tight knit conservative cabal of MONGO, Tbeatty, Tom Harrison and co, which seems to have run out of steam.
2. The Science cabal centered around Raul and others, editing on Global warming, intelligent design and so on.
3. The pro Israel crowd. Nowhere on wikipedia do users so uniformly work together to retain control of articles. Behind the scenes organization is inevitable.

"Cabals" 1 and 2 have something in common. They both work to exclude extreme "unscientific" viewpoints from hot topic articles. In MONGO and co's case it was with the 9/11 articles. However, after some success in their 9/11 war, they became drunk with power and began to lump everything they didn't like or understand in with the 9/11 theorists. Sowing the seeds of their doom as enemies mounted. The Israel crowd are just old fashioned POV gangsters, armed and ready for action regardless of policies or guidelines, taking no prisoners along the way. In any other area of WP, someone like User:Isarig would have been indefinitely banned ages ago. Within the safety of the crowd's ongoing protection racket, Isarig has relative immunity

This next post by Ben on WR dates back two years:

I have had almost no contact with Raul654, but I figured I'd provide a diff of the only contact, where he made what I consider an inappropriate comment when rejecting my RFA.

I filed an RFAr against FeloniousMonk, Duncharris, and RoyBoy. Duncharris and RoyBoy respondents to my request made derogatory comments about me personally, especially administrator Duncharris (known, and RFC'd for writing things like "FUCK OFF" in his edit summaries) who said I was a "lowly troll" "childish" etc. Prior to filing the RFAr Duncharris had even vandalized an article I had written, which he admitted to doing in his statement. FeloniousMonk pulled the "improper procedure" card, and accused me of failing to seek any other dispute resolution, which is a lie which I also pointed out in the RfAr (I, in fact, asked FM to participate in an RFC filed against him, and he said he would ignore it. I noted this in the RfAr.)

Irrespective of the blatant abuse simply within the RFAr statements, Raul noted in his rejection, that

"One need only take a cursory look at Talk:Intelligent design to see that FeloniousMonk's actions are EXACTLY what we expect our admins to do. →Raul654 07:17, 10 November 2005 (UTC)"

This was extremely upsetting to me, because it seemed to be giving these people carte blanche to abuse me. They clearly took carte blanche, repeatedly, until I finally snapped back at their passive-aggressive and condescending bullying and was permanently banned.

If you (Jimbo) would like a small glimpse of what I experienced at Wikipedia, please see my Anti-Bullying petition that I was going to send to you before it was attacked and destroyed by FeloniousMonk and various other people. Please check the history and edit summaries as well.

[Jon Awbrey]

From that same statement …

DHMO aka Giggy ''also'' has repeated the "ID CABAL" bullshit which started on WR

Does anyone know where it actually started?

It started on Wikipedia, when it became apparent that a group of editors on ID and other scientific topics were tighter and more aggressive than a squadron of Gurkhas.

To prove that Giggy and Moulton weren't the first to notice this on WR, here is a post by me a year ago, before either of them were members of this site:

The 3 groups that most closely resemble a cabal on WP are

1. The tight knit conservative cabal of MONGO, Tbeatty, Tom Harrison and co, which seems to have run out of steam.
2. The Science cabal centered around Raul and others, editing on Global warming, intelligent design and so on.
3. The pro Israel crowd. Nowhere on wikipedia do users so uniformly work together to retain control of articles. Behind the scenes organization is inevitable.

"Cabals" 1 and 2 have something in common. They both work to exclude extreme "unscientific" viewpoints from hot topic articles. In MONGO and co's case it was with the 9/11 articles. However, after some success in their 9/11 war, they became drunk with power and began to lump everything they didn't like or understand in with the 9/11 theorists. Sowing the seeds of their doom as enemies mounted. The Israel crowd are just old fashioned POV gangsters, armed and ready for action regardless of policies or guidelines, taking no prisoners along the way. In any other area of WP, someone like User:Isarig would have been indefinitely banned ages ago. Within the safety of the crowd's ongoing protection racket, Isarig has relative immunity

This next post by Ben on WR dates back two years:

I have had almost no contact with Raul654, but I figured I'd provide a diff of the only contact, where he made what I consider an inappropriate comment when rejecting my RFA.

I filed an RFAr against FeloniousMonk, Duncharris, and RoyBoy. Duncharris and RoyBoy respondents to my request made derogatory comments about me personally, especially administrator Duncharris (known, and RFC'd for writing things like "FUCK OFF" in his edit summaries) who said I was a "lowly troll" "childish" etc. Prior to filing the RFAr Duncharris had even vandalized an article I had written, which he admitted to doing in his statement. FeloniousMonk pulled the "improper procedure" card, and accused me of failing to seek any other dispute resolution, which is a lie which I also pointed out in the RfAr (I, in fact, asked FM to participate in an RFC filed against him, and he said he would ignore it. I noted this in the RfAr.)

Irrespective of the blatant abuse simply within the RFAr statements, Raul noted in his rejection, that

"One need only take a cursory look at Talk:Intelligent design to see that FeloniousMonk's actions are EXACTLY what we expect our admins to do. →Raul654 07:17, 10 November 2005 (UTC)"

This was extremely upsetting to me, because it seemed to be giving these people carte blanche to abuse me. They clearly took carte blanche, repeatedly, until I finally snapped back at their passive-aggressive and condescending bullying and was permanently banned.

If you (Jimbo) would like a small glimpse of what I experienced at Wikipedia, please see my Anti-Bullying petition that I was going to send to you before it was attacked and destroyed by FeloniousMonk and various other people. Please check the history and edit summaries as well.

Stop trying to confuse us with your original research. This is Wikipedia we're talking about. The facts are beside the point.

Jon (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/cool.gif)